Manley said even among those who suffered mild spine trauma, he is struck by a pattern that shows how their upper bodies were flung forward and then backward over the lap belts that kept them in their seats and undoubtedly saved their lives.

Pat Bedard, former Indy car driver and staff writer for Car and Driver, described in one of his columns his last race. After squeezing into the cockpit and getting the five-point harness latched-up by his crew chief (with some effort), he tested the restraint and told the chief, "Take it up 3/4s of an inch." Unbuckle, get out of cockpit, remove seat, grab wrench and make the requested adjustment. Back in the car, harness latched with even more effort, and another wiggle-check. This time he was satisfied that he was part of the car. Sometime during the race something went squirrelly, the car went in several directions at once, shedding parts (but not the driver) as designed, and he woke up two weeks later in the hospital. He said that, had that final adjustment not been made, he would've been more severely injured. He then went on to describe the minimal "restraint" provided by the lap/shoulder belt offered in passenger cars, particularly the freedom of motion the shoulder belt afforded so one could adjust the heater or radio or something, and its frequent inability to retract to an effective position. He said that if you could easily slip your hand under the belt it was too loose.

While there have been improvements in belt tensioners, the design is still a compromise. If the restraint system allows any free motion before it is called into play it can increase the possibility of injury. Most users find a properly-tensioned belt to be uncomfortable, leave it loose, and reduce or negate its effectiveness. The lap belt's purpose is to prevent the wearer from pitching forward and upwards out of the seat during sudden deceleration. In aircraft it keeps the wearer in the seat during abrupt vertical movements. That's about it.

I think the seats should face back AND all planes should have open cargo doors at the back of the plane during takeoff so all non properly stowed electronics will exit the plane. And it'd be biatchin to watch the ground drop away. And who the hell would argue with flight attendants about putting on their seatbelt and sitting down when they are busy fearing for their life?

didja see the way the plane cartwheeled, <b>sub-sh*tter</b>? do you THINK that maybe had some folks not worn their belts that MAYBE they would have become wall paste as opposed to alive? I dunno, perhaps you're an expert and wish to enlighten us with your expertise?

You missed the part about the 1988 regulations that required airplanes seats to withstand 16g acceleration instead of the previous regulation of 8g, as crash data showed passengers who would have otherwise survived were killed from being thrown around a cabin while still belted in their broken-loose seats?

Jackson Herring:Manley said even among those who suffered mild spine trauma, he is struck by a pattern that shows how their upper bodies were flung forward and then backward over the lap belts that kept them in their seats and undoubtedly saved their lives.

what are you trying to do here submitter

To be honest, the lap belts haven't much to do with survivability in a plane crash. It is more the facing of the seat and the closeness of the seat in front of you.The safest seats in the plane?The Flight Attendant Jump Seat. Why? They face the rear of the plane. Doesn't look comfy, but in a crash it'd absorb the energy from the sudden stop. Second safest?Riding Coach. The seats are closer together, and most are cushioned in the back, providing for a soft spot when your head and body lunge forward. Third safest?First/Business Class. While comfy in-flight, these seats in the upright position provide little to nothing in a crash. You'll go further in your seat in a crash, which in turn leads to worse injuries.

namatad:The My Little Pony Killer: Alive with a hurt back is still alive.

alive with a crushed spine and never being able to walk again is still alive.

Unlike that poor girl who might have survived the crash but got killed by an emergency vehicle.

FWIW, it is yet to be determined if she was killed by an emergency vehicle.

She had injuries that appeared consistent with being run over, but she was seated in the same general area as the other fatality. Since that victim was found outside the aircraft (apparently ejected during the crash), it is entirely possible if not likely that the second one was also ejected and possibly run over post-mortem.

RoyBatty:Dr Dreidel: RoyBatty: Aircraft are pretty darn safe, but if rare accidents were even more survivable by rotating the seats and there were few other costs or problems associated with that, I think I'd prefer to travel backwards.

What if airlines had to jack up fees because of all the extra barf bags?

Seriously, for the motion-sick, traveling backwards on an airplane is like rubbing poison ivy on an itchy red patch of skin. I took Dramamine and Xanax before my last flight and was still nauseous the whole 5-hour ride.

Yeah, I think that might a real reason it's a non-starter.

I sort of think that google cars might lead to backward facing front row passengers since it is safer and more social, or even side to side sitting passengers like on a pod at Disneyland since people might like to have some frontwards visibility and the additional safety of a google car would presumably make side to side seating more preferential to two rows of people facing forward.

Google cars, that's funny. We will never be able to build a database so error free as to allow driverless cars except on predetermined streets. And even then every state has different markings. Just let Google try to dictate to Indiana or Texas how to mark all their roads and construction zones to be machine readable for on the fly adjustment. Some places already can't get signs to tell the correct lane closed. Even with a technically perfect ride, it would rely on too many externalities to function for long in the real world.

"But what if you're onboard that 1 in 1.2 million flights that ends up in an accident? Surprisingly, you're much more likely to walk away from an airline accident than you are to perish. In fact, a staggering 95.7 percent of people involved in plane crashes survive. Even in the most serious class of crashes, more than 76 percent survive [source: NTSB]."

considering the tail of the plane hit first and broke off then the nose and body slammed the ground from like a 30 degree angle, then the plane did a 360, Im not surprised at all the lower spine injuries. The lap belts kept the lower half of the body pretty stable while the upper part was swinging every which way. The drop seat on the front bulkhead has shoulder harnesses. If they have one in the 777 then that persons neck would have been farked.

Im not a chiropractor but I stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

I'd like to know how many eye, face and forehead injuries from the farking marketing credit card scam machines they have in the farking head rests right at eye level. basically a ready to go shrapnel kit right in your face, just to get a few more bucks out of you. fark those are the worst invention ever. read a paperback fer gods sake

spawn73:asmodeus224: kingoomieiii: "Oh no I yanked my back out when I slammed against the seatbelt"

vs

"Oh no we're all bouncing around in the plane on impact, snapping limbs against each other because there are no seatbelts"

Or perhaps a third option you may have overlooked where you have a three point seatbelt, like you have in cars,and no one comes out with extensive and severe whiplash?

If you read the article, I hope you haven't, then you'd know that it would likely have the opposite effect.

Passengers would have to wear neck braces like racecar drivers to avoid whiplash.

It's been a long-time since I've been on a plane, but don't the flight attendants wear four-point seat belts and sit facing the back of the plane?

My own instinct is that a company like Volvo would be good at coming up with ideas for reducing fatalities. They have some sort of whiplash technology for cars. Maybe airbags (I think some airplanes already have them in first-class). I also think that having the trays and TVs where you're supposed to brace your head doesn't make sense.

Some of the injuries are compression fractures which given the hard landing is no surprise, and not something you can pin on the seat belts. Also the injuries to ligaments aren't surprising given how the plane whipped around on the ground after impact.

alienated:RoyBatty: I guess this crash is more evidence for having the seats face the rear of the plane (but who would like to ride like that?) (how would that work on takeoff?)

[i.imgur.com image 524x634]

Same as it works on roller coasters that go backwards.

By work, I meant more of how passengers would perceive it. Make takeoffs more queasy?

On backwards roller coasters you most likely (these days) have that big over the head bar, and on an airline that of course would never occur, nor would most passengers want a roller coaster like ride.

Facing the seats around is probably a non-starter - I like flying - I think I'd dislike facing backwards.